Beach hut owners have been ordered to pay five times more to rent out their shacks following a crackdown on anti-social behaviour.

Canterbury City Council has acted after receiving several complaints from disgruntled residents about noise and litter created by visitors holding gatherings at the seafront huts in Herne Bay and Whitstable.

In the wake of these concerns the authority’s cabinet has voted to hike the sum owners will have to pay for the privilege of subletting the properties.

Previously they paid 20% of their ground rent fee, which in Whitstable worked out at an additional £155 on top of the £755 annual charge.

Now they will have to pay 100% of the yearly fee - so an extra £755 in Whitstable and £548 in Herne Bay.

Seasalter councillor Ashley Clark told colleagues he supports “tightening the screw” on anyone renting out the shacks to holidaymakers who cause a nuisance on the district’s beaches.

“If there’s anyone that should be making money out of subletting huts it should be the council, because it’s our land,” the Conservative explained.

“If they’re making money at our expense, which is what they’re doing effectively, then we’ll have some of it.”

Despite the considerable hike to the sub-let charges, a council officer told the cabinet: “The fee isn’t an income generator for the council.

“There are so few people doing this it makes very little difference to us.”

Authority bosses had initially considered banning subletting entirely.

When quizzed about outlawing it earlier this year, 59% of beach hut owners believed it should not be allowed, while just 35% thought it should be.

But after KentOnline reported that some owners feared they would have to sell their seafront shacks if the ban was enforced, the idea was ditched.

There are 663 beach huts in the district that are privately owned but subject to a yearly site fee paid to the council.

Eighteen of them have permission to be sublet for short periods, and only 13 have active subletting tenancies.

Despite this, Reculver Conservative Rachel Carnac suggested plans for a total ban could be revisited.

“Maybe we should look at [stopping] subletting full stop in the future,” she added.

“If we are subletting we should be subletting for vastly larger amounts of money.”

More than half of hut owners told the local authority they have experienced problems as a result of shacks being rented out.

About a third support the subletting fee rise, while 45% oppose the move.

Cabinet members heard from officers “the complaints are all about antisocial behaviour, noise, litter - basically people partying at someone’s hut when they’ve rented it”.

Councillors also voted to cap the size of groups able to rent out huts to eight people, and to shorten the notice period the authority needs to give owners before retracting their right to sublet from nine months to six.